1250
submitted 10 months ago by Custoslibera@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 153 points 10 months ago

Yesterday I bought something on Steam for the first time in many years. (I have a large Steam library, but in recent years I've been getting games from gog and itch instead.)

Since I hadn't bought from Steam in a long time I figured I should read the "Steam Subscriber agreement" that you have to click to accept when you buy something. Let me just say now, the agreement is a very very bad deal for customers.

It goes to great lengths to make it very clear that you don't own anything. You aren't buying anything, you have no essentially rights. You are simply paying for a license subscription to use software with various conditions. Valve is able to end your subscription with no refund if you break the agreement. And the best bit:

Furthermore, Valve may amend this Agreement (including any Subscription Terms or Rules of Use) unilaterally at any time in its sole discretion.

So by using Steam we're putting a lot of trust in Valve; because the 'agreement' basically says they can do whatever they want, any time they want, for any reason they want.

Steam is quite good. I particularly appreciate their Linux support. But they are clearly using their position of dominance to make people agree to unfavourable terms. At the moment, things are fine. But make no mistake - when you use Steam, Valve has all the power. They can screw people over whenever they choose to.

With all that in mind, buying DRM free is better if you want to still have access to the software when a company decides to change direction for whatever reason.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 74 points 10 months ago

Apparently you like to read. Open the EULA for basically any commercial software (not FOSS or open source, costs money, isn't made by some small company, basically the same criteria as >90% of the games on Steam) and you are going to learn 2 things very quickly. First, all of them are just a license to use, and second, if there are patches or an online component you will have at least as many caveats and restrictions as what is included in the Steam TOS.

Now, I'm not saying you're wrong or that I'm okay with this situation (I look for open source, free, then paid for all the software that lets me do whatever it is I'm trying to do), but the situation with Steam is very typical.

[-] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Terms like that matters more for some services than for others. For something like Spotify or Netflix, if they terminate the agreement it doesn't matter much. You lose access, but there was no accumulated value. So you can just go somewhere with only minor inconvenience. Whereas on Steam, if they terminate the agreement then you could lose decades worth of accumulated games from your library - which could be very valuable. So that's a big difference.

Now, it's unlikely that Steam will just press delete on everyone's account. But we can imagine a very profit-hungry leader taking over Steam and deciding to put the squeeze on their vast user-base. There are many things they could do; such as adding ads, requiring 'consent' to include spyware on your computer, or charging additional fees. Long term users would not be in a position to refuse these things, because their Steam library is being held as collateral.

If you trust that Steam is never going to give you up, and never going to let you down, etc. Then there is no problem. Things are currently going fine, and they may continue to be fine for a very long time. It's just a matter of trust, and power, and hedging.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago

The thing here is, people will talk and if there are any serious issues, a lot of people, myself included, will have no moral objection to pirating the games they already paid for access to. And in some jurisdictions, it won't even be illegal. Like with most enshittification situations, it isn't going to be there one day and gone the next, so liberating your games won't be overly difficult.

The big gotcha will be online multi-player games. If you don't have a server, the client doesn't matter.

[-] pkpenguin@lemmy.world 54 points 10 months ago

Doesn't matter, Steam offers DRM free games. Steam DRM is opt-in and can be broken by anyone in seconds, and games with other DRM have a big glowing warning on their store page. You give money to Steam for their servers that support multiplayer, their workshop, seamless patching, user forums, image hosting, controller support, Proton for Linux, SteamDB, easy multiplayer via the friends interface, achievement tracking, and a large majority cut to the developers. Your complaints apply to basically every storefront, the only way you'll own data is by having it on your own disk which Steam lets you do.

[-] Liz@midwest.social 5 points 10 months ago

Oh, uh, hello. How does one break this DRM, out of curiosity?

[-] pkpenguin@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

Depends on the game, sometimes you can just delete the steam dll next to the executable, others require a steam emulator which amounts to just dropping in a spoofed steam dll. I think the preferred emulator these days is Goldberg steam emu on gitlab.

[-] PotatoKat@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

If you have Baldur's Gate 3 you can boot it up from the Larian Launcher even if Steam is closed.

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 43 points 10 months ago

Very good point. Just because Valve hasn't screwed us over yet is no excuse for assuming they never will.

[-] pancakes@sh.itjust.works 13 points 10 months ago

Not to say it won't happen, but if a corporation tried to mess with steam libraries, it would raise hell like nothing the internet has ever seen.

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 22 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yeah? And what would that achieve? What the hell are gamers gonna do?

For God's sake, we couldn't even keep a protest going on Reddit because people were afraid of the sunk costs. People give Valve money.

[-] thoughtorgan@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

If valve removed all of my purchases they would never get a single dime out of me again.

Would never be a move for them.

I think it's more realistic for this scenario to happen to me, rather than the majority. My account with 500+ games also happens to have 30+ VAC bans.

[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 13 points 10 months ago

Valve isn't going to remove your purchases unless Valve goes bankrupt.

But make no mistake, they will do other anti-consumer and anti-competitor bullshit once Gabe leaves and the company becomes publicly traded.

Things like throttling your download speed unless you pay their subscription. Being forced to watch ads whenever you browse your library.

This is why we should NEVER put so much trust in a company that they can build up a monopoly, like all those Gabe stans are doing.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

This one corpos.

I just threw up a little bit thinking about that future that 100% is coming when the business school fuckheads take over valve.

There is no "good will" towards customers, it's everything is a service and every single aspect of our product should be monetized... Downloading is a cost, monetize it! Browsing libraries has eyeballs focused on it, advertise!

To these assholes it's dumb not to do that.

[-] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Is it being a Stan to recognize all of the so called "competition" is dog shit? You want more competition? Provide better alternatives, there are VERY FEW corp's with the pro customer attitude history that Valve has

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

But that's the key word, isn't it -- "history"?

Valve hasn't screwed us over yet, and that's why I like them very much. Now. But neither did Google or Reddit, in the beginning. In fact, Reddit was a safe haven for people who left Digg after it became pay to win, and look at them now.

[-] Kedly@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Thats fair, but also realistically, until Valve turns, if they do, they are the best we're getting out of a corporation in the capitalist society we currently live in. And honestly, if Valve turns, I'll just go back to pirating

[-] kungen@feddit.nu 18 points 10 months ago

Not saying that I disagree, but it has basically always been written like that...

[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.de 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah, but that's not a reason that something is bad. As pointed out. Buying DRM free is the only possibility to really own the games you purchased.

[-] thoughtorgan@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

Welcome to the modern world. Pretty much lines up with 99% of services people use daily.

I won't ever move from steam to GoG, valve makes everything too convenient.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

You can use them both of course. That's what I do, and I usually just go with the one with the best price or best deal.

If it's a game that I really need to be DRM free, then GoG is best.

[-] daniskarma@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

There's anothee way to keep having access to software no matter what companies do.

I have the generic steam crack well saved in my computer in case the decide to pull the plug.

[-] PotatoKat@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Very good idea, I gotta look into that

[-] kariboka@bolha.forum 2 points 10 months ago

How you do it?

[-] Mango@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Steam effectively makes buying games itself count as MTX. They're making your Steam library no different from your MMO inventory.

That said, I'm addicted.

[-] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago

To be fair, if you would own it, they would have a very different legal framework to be working in. Would they be legally allowed to shut down their servers? Or would they have to run the company until bankruptcy, so maybe decades after steam stopped being profitable? Their product is a service based on. They want the service to be able to be ended. If you buy the games like you do on steam and you own them, can they end it?

[-] SomethingBurger@jlai.lu 0 points 10 months ago

It goes to great lengths to make it very clear that you don't own anything. You aren't buying anything, you have no essentially rights. You are simply paying for a license subscription to use software with various conditions. Valve is able to end your subscription with no refund if you break the agreement.

True, but:

but in recent years I've been getting games from gog

GOG shills always claim their platform is better because muh DRM-free games and actual ownership but GOG's User Agreement states:

We give you and other GOG users the personal right (known legally as a 'licence') to use GOG services and to download, access and/or stream (depending on the content) and use GOG content. This licence is for your personal use. We can stop or suspend this licence in some situations, which are explained later on.

[-] Minnels@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago

But once you have downloaded the installer you have the game drm free. Put it on a usb stick or whatever, your gog account doesn't matter any more.

[-] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah. That's the difference. GOG can withdraw their services, but not the software that you've downloaded. Whereas Steam explicitly states that using the software may require their services (and it usually does).

this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
1250 points (97.6% liked)

Memes

45646 readers
1105 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS